[sgiitk]

Now MH is having similar ideas, incl a cess on Petrol.

[AstonMartin]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

They must have gone Bonkers. Working couples, or major children; how do they accommodate them? Typical left mindset.

Excuse me The left are not running the government now. It is the Congress that is running it. Will you blame it on the left for collection on higher road tax in KA and AP or in other states in India? This is not a move to increase revenue, but a step towards dissuading people from buying more private vehicles. Come to Kerala and drive a little to understand why this move was needed.

[ecosport]

Originally Posted by AstonMartin

Excuse me The left are not running the government now. It is the Congress that is running it. Will you blame it on the left for collection on higher road tax in KA and AP or in other states in India?

Mr Gupta is only talking about the (left) mindset. Congress or BJP, every party in Kerala has a left mindset.

This is not a move to increase revenue, but a step towards dissuading people from buying more private vehicles.

This still remains an assumption. Probably, it is his conviction too, but if he thinks that I would drive my two cars the roads together, is as flawed an assumption as his leftist ideology.

[AstonMartin]

Originally Posted by ecosport

Mr Gupta is only talking about the (left) mindset. Congress or BJP, every party in Kerala has a left mindset.

Pray enlighten me what this left mindset is!!. This new proposal is not a way to increase the revenue because they could have directly increased the road tax to the levels of neighboring states for the first purchase itself. The same minister who want this implemented also said that due to vehicle density the road width should be 70 meters instead of the 45 meters(accepted just for Goa and Kerala) and the 30 meters that the trader's associations and some extremist organizations want. Thus clearly the number of accidents and the lack of infrastructure to ply this many number of private vehicles on those narrow roads are in the minister's mind. I wonder how people find fault with the rules that are meant to improve the safety of our roads. The only mindset that comes into play here is that Indians submit themself without any questions to harsher rules when they are settled in foreign lands. In the home country they question everything from rules on helmet to speed limits.

[ecosport]

Originally Posted by AstonMartin

Pray enlighten me what this left mindset is!!. This new proposal is not a way to increase the revenue because they could have directly increased the road tax to the levels of neighboring states for the first purchase itself. The same minister who want this implemented also said that due to vehicle density the road width should be 70 meters instead of the 45 meters(accepted just for Goa and Kerala) and the 30 meters that the trader's associations and some extremist organizations want. Thus clearly the number of accidents and the lack of infrastructure to ply this many number of private vehicles on those narrow roads are in the minister's mind. I wonder how people find fault with the rules that are meant to improve the safety of our roads. The only mindset that comes into play here is that Indians submit themself without any questions to harsher rules when they are settled in foreign lands. In the home country they question everything from rules on helmet to speed limits.

If you can explain how this new rule will help decrease vehicle density, it would help.

If I am single, and have two cars, would I ply both on the road at the same time? No. That means, for all practical purposes, vehicle density remains the same.

If I have a spouse, and if we have two cars and if we are travelling to the same place, we would still use only one car. Now, if we both have to travel to two different places, if we have two cars, we would use both. And that means two cars on the road. If we buy only one car due to the extra 2%, either of us would use the car, and the other hails a cab. That means, again, two cars on the road. What problem does it solve?

Butttttt, instead of making all these new laws, if the govt runs a few more of those low floor buses, people would be tempted to leave their cars at home, and take those AC Volvo buses. Currently, the Kerala govt is only interested in running the "idi vandis". (The low-floors that are running now are alms given by the Central govt.)

Coming back to your initial question, the "notion that public behaviors could be controlled by making more laws" however arbitrary they may be, is a left mindset. That anybody enjoying life is rich and should be taxed till they die, is a left mindset.

[AstonMartin]

Originally Posted by ecosport

If you can explain how this new rule will help decrease vehicle density, it would help.

When you tend to have private vehicles, you tend to use them more. You prefer them over public transport. And that spouse who does not have a car will not hail a taxi every single day. He/she will walk to the nearest bus stop/auto stand.Most of the houses either do not have a parking space or they have only parking space for one. This leads to the second car being parked on the road. Which in turn leads to traffic congestion. This tax also will be a psychological deterrent to those who buy a second car just because the tax is less.

I agree wholly with your thought that the government should invest more in public transport.

And for your knowledge, Left ideology in not about taxing someone because they have a car, but it is more about equal distribution of wealth. It is about getting together against exploitation of the poor and the unorganized. If someone feels the heat due to this organization of the weak and poor, then it is not the ideology at fault. But that discussion is for another time or thread.

[figo_mba]

Originally Posted by ecosport

If you can explain how this new rule will help decrease vehicle density, it would help.

If I am single, and have two cars, would I ply both on the road at the same time? No. That means, for all practical purposes, vehicle density remains the same.

If I have a spouse, and if we have two cars and if we are travelling to the same place, we would still use only one car. Now, if we both have to travel to two different places, if we have two cars, we would use both. And that means two cars on the road. If we buy only one car due to the extra 2%, either of us would use the car, and the other hails a cab. That means, again, two cars on the road. What problem does it solve?

Don't agree to this. Me and wife work in the same area but we have two cars. We travel at the same time in the morning but she returns earlier. So we have two cars for the purpose, a nano and a figo.

Having said that, I hate the policy of taxing the second car more. If I am selling the first car to buy the second one then is this still applicable? Since I will be left with one car only then. Right ?

[ecosport]

Originally Posted by AstonMartin

When you tend to have private vehicles, you tend to use them more. You prefer them over public transport. And that spouse who does not have a car will not hail a taxi every single day. He/she will walk to the nearest bus stop/auto stand.Most of the houses either do not have a parking space or they have only parking space for one. This leads to the second car being parked on the road. Which in turn leads to traffic congestion. This tax also will be a psychological deterrent to those who buy a second car just because the tax is less.

This is an example of the leftist mindset. That you should control a behaviour by inconveniencing somebody rather than providing him with a better alternative. In other words, you are taking away his choices, so that he is forced to do what YOU want him to, and not because he wants to do that.

And for your knowledge, Left ideology in not about taxing someone because they have a car, but it is more about equal distribution of wealth. It is about getting together against exploitation of the poor and the unorganized. If someone feels the heat due to this organization of the weak and poor, then it is not the ideology at fault. But that discussion is for another time or thread.

What you described is the goal. Leftists think that the goal could be achieved by taking from the rich and giving to the poor. I think that equal distribution of wealth can never be achieved as long as people are born with different abilities and talents. I will leave it at that. No more OT from me.

Originally Posted by figo_mba

Don't agree to this. Me and wife work in the same area but we have two cars. We travel at the same time in the morning but she returns earlier. So we have two cars for the purpose, a nano and a figo.

I just gave an example of why spouses would want to have two cars: Travel direction. You just added one more reason: Time difference.

[zenren]

Originally Posted by ecosport

This is an example of the leftist mindset. That you should control a behaviour by inconveniencing somebody rather than providing him with a better alternative. In other words, you are taking away his choices, so that he is forced to do what YOU want him to, and not because he wants to do that.

Disagree that the quoted example is leftist mindset. I doubt if there is any person in the world who pays any kind of tax because he wants to, and not because he is forced to? Does that mean all governments across the globe follow a leftist mindset?

[ecosport]

Originally Posted by zenren

Disagree that the quoted example is leftist mindset. I doubt if there is any person in the world who pays any kind of tax because he wants to, and not because he is forced to? Does that mean all governments across the globe follow a leftist mindset?

Wasn't i clear enough? I was not talking about forcing people to pay taxes, but forcing them to use public transport by taxing the cars. They should make the public transport better so that people would start using it willingly., than taking his choices away from him.

[zenren]

Originally Posted by ecosport

Wasn't i clear enough? I was not talking about forcing people to pay taxes, but forcing them to use public transport by taxing the cars. They should make the public transport better so that people would start using it willingly., than taking his choices away from him.

Not sure if I still understand your point. Which country doesn't tax the private cars? As said earlier, no one is banning the second vehicle. You just need to pay a premium if you want a second vehicle. That's all.

There is something called congestion charge in London. Does that come under leftist mindset as per your definition?

Public transport will always be less convenient than having a private mode of transport, be it in any part of the world. Its just the cost to abide by the law (tolls & fines) while having a private vehicle that acts as a deterrent in most developed countries. For example, the cost to own a car might be lesser in some countries but then they could offset it with huge fines for illegal parking. Naturally, with more cars on the road, some would not have space to park and might lose the time they gained with taking private vehicle when they struggle to find a spot to park.

[vipulbatta]

I feel these are great ideas. Perhaps they will deter some folks from buying that 2nd car they don't really need.
At the same time, they should encourage EVs by either not including them in this extra tax or give some additional tax breaks. So at least that 2nd car you have can be environmentally friendly and reduce fuel usage. It will also encourage the Govt and companies to take EVs seriously once the demand becomes higher.

[ecosport]

Originally Posted by zenren

Not sure if I still understand your point. Which country doesn't tax the private cars? As said earlier, no one is banning the second vehicle. You just need to pay a premium if you want a second vehicle. That's all.

There is something called congestion charge in London. Does that come under leftist mindset as per your definition?

Public transport will always be less convenient than having a private mode of transport, be it in any part of the world. Its just the cost to abide by the law (tolls & fines) while having a private vehicle that acts as a deterrent in most developed countries. For example, the cost to own a car might be lesser in some countries but then they could offset it with huge fines for illegal parking. Naturally, with more cars on the road, some would not have space to park and might lose the time they gained with taking private vehicle when they struggle to find a spot to park.

Every country has some degree of leftist policies. Heck, even the USA has worker protection and wage policies that companies send manufacturing jobs to communist China, where no worker protection policies exist.

That something is done in London does not make it right. Also what works in London need not work here. Policies should be chosen wisely.

(1) A policy should be enforceable. Here I fail to understand how it would be enforced and uniformly.

(2) The benefits of having that policy should outweigh the costs of implementing it. I don't think that the resulting tax collection would be enough to implement the system.

(3) More policies mean more corruption. These policies would be implemented the the same men we say are corrupt. What we should do for curbing corruption is to give less policies to these people to implement.

Without apparent benefits, I see no reason why people's liberties should be taken away.

Leftists think that people's behaviours can be controlled by creating more policies/rules/laws. Actually, people will find a way to circumvent it, and it is just a matter of time before they find ways around this one too.

[jkdas]

Bikers not to exceed 50kmph plus
Cars to be on 70kmph
Additional tax for 2nd car ( what about 3rd, 4th :P)
Hartal once in a month
Public transport cutting on their bus service
Major roads smaller than your private roads
No place to park at major business centers.
Tippers/Trucks with no speed limits


Flocks with Rolls, Porsche etc , how do you manage?

p.s. Who did the study? I also would like to see the dude who brought in the sunfilm ban.

[autotranny]

Originally Posted by jkdas

I also would like to see the dude who brought in the sunfilm ban.

Yes that is the dumbest idea ever that occurred to the judiciary AND have the crime rates gone down after that ? I think someone should file a PIL to get this order retracted.

Coming back to the tax issue at hand, why is everyone going bonkers about the 1 or 2% additional that you would have to pay for the 2nd car ?

There is brighter side to this meeting 1) Uniform tax across all states and 2) No tax for movement of vehicles of more than 2 years age across states.

That is the best news for Working professionals like me who are forced to hide from RTO authorities everytime I travel around.

Footnote : I don't know if the person who started the debate about the leftist mindset of the Kerala Govt. has been to Kerala or not. Anyway end of the day, we are not mere leftists. We are aware of our rights and we are encouraged by our culture to express our opinion freely. And we think, therefore we are.